Are our democratic institutions imploding, or is heated debate an inevitable part of the system, and evidence of diverse representation of interests?

Rob Ford, charging through the city hall chamber, knocks over Councillor Pam McConnell during a raucous council meeting last November. Democracy in Canada, observers are noting, has become increasingly characterized by personal attacks, though most are verbal rather than physical.

Their sparring words may have been more eloquent, but even politicians hundreds of years ago were dropping the moral equivalent of “yo momma” jokes in democracy’s hallowed halls.

When a political foe told him he would “certainly either die upon the gallows or of syphilis,” John Wilkes, a British member of parliament in the late 1700s, shot back with venom: “That will depends, my Lord, upon whether I embrace your principles or your mistress,” he replied.

Rife with the conflict that comes from opposing views, our accepted system of government has always encouraged high-running emotions, intense debates and, all too often, nasty exchanges. Messiness and democracy have long gone hand in hand.

But, surrounded by extreme examples of bickering boards and combative councils, it’s hard not to feel democracy has hit an all-time low.

The crisis of civility is not just local: An Alberta school principal recently complained about language used by provincial legislators — including a comment about the opposition finding the ability to “suck and blow every single day” — while school children toured the legislature, vowing the children would no longer attend Question Period on future trips.

Are our democratic institutions imploding, or is heated debate just an inevitable part of the system, serving as evidence of a healthy diversity of representation?

Researchers interviewed by the Star agree there has a recent downward spiral in the conduct of our politicians and civility in office, both on a local scale and in other levels of government.

Gary Levy, a political scientist at Carleton University, says it’s hard to pinpoint what prompted it — a spike in tumultuous minority governments, maybe the polarizing influence of the U.S. — but agrees politicians’ behaviour has seen a change for the worse.

“I just get the feeling that there’s no longer the concept of fair is fair, and do unto others — golden rule type of thing. It’s rather ‘the end justifies the means,’ and ‘we’ll do anything to stay in power.’”

The result, he says, is that many politicians no longer play by the rules, either explicit or implicit, of democracy. He cites Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s first proroguing of parliament, which allowed his government to duck a vote of non-confidence, a vital part of the federal government’s system of checks and balances on power.

Playing by the unwritten rules of democracy, a politician should leave if he or she has lost the support of their council, Levy said. But Ford has stayed on, he said, because he is basing his political legitimacy on votes alone, not his actions as a politician.

“In any normal situation, a person who is censured seriously for his actions should resign … . Most people would say, ‘Well, that’s the end,’” he said.

Politicians behaving badly may be an attention-grabbing tactic, says Dennis Pilon, a York University political science professor and author of Wrestling with Democracy. At a school board level — a common launching pad for political careers — representatives have a low profile, and may make headlines by being difficult.

“Sometimes conflict is a better way of raising your profile than co-operation,” Pilon said.

He added that a lack of party politics in institutions such as a school board or a municipal government can exacerbate tensions between politicians. Political parties act to temper an individual’s outlandish behaviour, he said, because the brand of the party is associated with one person’s actions.

The decline of respectful debate in general — spurred in part by the Internet easing our ability to hurl invective at one another — could partly account for diminishing civility in politics, said Howard Doughty, who teaches political economy at Seneca College.

But he warns, too, about the dangers of political politesse, which can cover up fundamental differences on important matters.

“Politeness is sometimes an overrated issue, especially if you have really serious and importantly divisive issues,” he said.

Heated and passionate arguments are indeed a sign of a healthy government with a diversity of opinions. Hazel McCallion, who has served as Mississauga’s mayor for more than three decades, says ardent debate is necessary to make the best decisions.

“If somebody believes in something, I would hope it would be debated with passion. But I think what’s happening in some councils is personal attacks. Democracy never included that, I can tell you,” she said.

Finding the sweet spot where there are both respectful relations and fervent discussion seems to be a mission impossible for many governments, big and small.

But to keep democracy legitimate, they need to try: Voters, particularly the much-sought-after youth, are turned off by ugliness in politics and could opt out entirely.

Jon Pammett, a Carleton University political science professor and expert in survey research, says polls of young voters repeatedly show discomfort with the level of disrespect in politics. That becomes a factor in low voter turnout, when political nastiness takes the form of attack ads.

When an election campaign focuses on a candidate’s personal flaws rather than policy issues, many young voters do not feel the need to cast their ballot.

“It’s part of the attitude that people tend to have towards voting, which is not so much ‘I’m never going to vote.’ It’s more, ‘Well, I’ll vote when it’s important to vote,’” he said.

More on thestar.com

We value respectful and thoughtful discussion. Readers are encouraged to flag comments that fail to meet the standards outlined in our
Community Code of Conduct.
For further information, including our legal guidelines, please see our full website
Terms and Conditions.